Assessing the authoritativeness of Canadian and American health documents: a comparative analysis using informetric methodologies |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Fucape Business School, Av. Fernando Ferrari, 1358 – Boa Vista, 29075-505 Vitória, ES, Brazil;2. FACAPE – Campus Universitário, s/n – Vila Eduardo, 56.300-00 Petrolina, PE, Brazil;1. School of Management, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK;2. College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar;3. The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia;1. Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea;2. School of Public Administration, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Government publications have long been considered authoritative sources of information regardless of the format (electronic via the WWW or paper) they are published in, and with little consideration as to how they are researched and written. Given the greater accessibility that the WWW provides the public to this very important source of information on a wide variety of subjects, assessing authoritativeness becomes a bigger and more difficult issue. The research and comparative analysis presented here continues a pilot study that applies informetric methods, especially citation analysis, to assess whether the blind trust afforded government publications is appropriate in such an important area of public policy and to see whether the two different types of health systems in Canada and the United States might have an effect on how these publications are produced. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
